In a discussion at the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee regarding the Draft Law, Tal Kopel, a researcher on Israeli society and a representative of the Kivun Forum, presented a complex stance that places significant responsibility on the army. In an interview with Arutz Sheva, he elaborates and explains.
The proposal presented by Kopel involves creating an alternative IDF ethos. "Unlike the current IDF ethos document, which primarily represents liberal progressive values-what is called democratic values-these were values introduced to the army by the elite and the hegemony in the 1990s, and soldiers pay with their bodies and lives for these values," he said.
According to him, it must be understood that recruiting the haredi community is not merely about quotas; it's the integration of a society with a distinct identity and worldview, which, upon entering the army, will change it fundamentally. Kopel points out that the army's name as the army of defense doesn't only reflect its role as the defender of the Jewish people but is a term Ben Gurion sought to convey the connection between the Hagannah organization and the emerging army. This means that "the IDF is an ideological, political, and educational system beyond its role as a security body."
Now, he says, "The entry of the haredim should be done from a new perspective on the IDF, based on equal and fair partnership. It is no longer possible to view secularism as the default character of a military base if we want to see the haredi community integrate into the army." The perception, says Kopel, needs to change regarding the meaning of a Jewish army and its purity of camp. "The IDF's ethos should primarily draw from Judaism and the great mission of eradicating evil in the world, as well as from a unique historical and religious belief system."
"Today, the army represents a population that is increasingly leaving it. The fighting army is the army of Israel's second class, and the senior command comes from the first class of Israel. There is a contradiction between the culture and values of the organization and the people within it, and this is dangerous for the cohesion of the IDF and not state-like, not populist, and not moral. If the IDF is the army of the people, then the people's values should be the army's values, and these are no longer the values of the Mapai party, according to many people."
Does this mean turning the army into a religious army, one where there is no place for opinions and values detached from religion? Kopel believes that in the new reality, the army's values should be adjusted to reflect democratic representation, and from this perspective, "If haredi soldiers are added to the religious and traditional ones, for whom Jewish values are the values from which they fight, it should be reflected in practice."
"There is a fight here between two value systems trying to impose themselves on the space. Anyone who tells me I'm making the army religious, I say to them that they're making it hollow. When you try to remove Jewish values and insert progressive liberal values, some even Christian, you're defining the general space and the question of proper integration. Against this reality, we must understand that both sides come with their own content and values, and each side has the right to see its values represented in the space. This is not a reality of suppression, like what happens to the religious Zionist soldier who does not receive the training he needs and is forced to compromise on values of modesty. The religious Zionist has become accustomed to compromising for the sake of unity. This reality is over."
Representing the values of all sides in the army and in its values, says Kopel, will result in soldiers who come to it out of mission, not coercion, after they have been subjected to decrees and sanctions. "We don’t want an army of Stalin's slaves with police and drawn guns behind soldiers. When a haredi person sees a report about romances in the army, he doesn't want to go there, and I understand his fear, alongside my understanding of the values of security."
Kopel expects that the haredi leadership and their rabbis will come to the army and declare that they want to integrate, they want to send their young people, but their demands from the army are specific. Kopel also points out that "liberal progressive values have led to disasters, destruction, and bloodshed, whereas Jewish values that talk about the separation of enemy and friend, of good and evil, can protect the lives of soldiers. This is a practical claim, not just a value-based one. Give me a Jewish army, and you’ll have fewer casualties, fewer injuries, and less PTSD."
"If the army wants to recruit haredim, it needs to understand that it must be a Jewish army, not an army that wants to educate everyone who comes to it on pseudo-values. If they want the Haredi to come to the army, they need to allow him to come from partnership, with his values included in the event, and the Hashmonaim battalion is the successful pilot that proves this. Jewish values should be the default. Partnership is needed, not subordination, equality, and not a hierarchical value system. If the army wants Haredim, it needs to be more Jewish."
"If the army is busy with absurd experiments, like integrating female tank crews with male soldiers and also says it wants haredi recruits, then either it is lying, and its goal is to bring down the government, or it is foolish and doesn't understand that this way it won’t recruit fighters. Either way, the result is that there are fewer fighters, and the reservists are worn out."